Debate with Jerry McDonald: Did God raise Jesus from the dead?
Tomorrow, Jerry McDonald is scheduled to post his opening statement affirming the debate resolution: It is a historical fact that God raised Jesus from the dead.
The debate will occur here, and I'll have two weeks to compose a rebuttal. There will be a total of five rounds plus one concluding brief statement from the affirmative side. This debate, I promise you, will not be a typical resurrection debate: for interested readers, I plan on using arguments along these lines in my rebuttals. Stay tuned.
The debate will occur here, and I'll have two weeks to compose a rebuttal. There will be a total of five rounds plus one concluding brief statement from the affirmative side. This debate, I promise you, will not be a typical resurrection debate: for interested readers, I plan on using arguments along these lines in my rebuttals. Stay tuned.
12 comments:
Don’t jump!
I recently listened to an exchange between Don Johnson and Dr. Price on the resurrection via Opposing Views.net podcast. Here Paul Arends wanted to get at the heart of the matter by way of interview. This exchange would take a few weeks with the conclusions presented. Wow, what a disaster! The opening arguments were the usual; Johnson using the bible as support for resurrection, and Dr. Price laying waste to these claims by means of intelligent questions. Johnson and Arends spent the remaining podcasts arguing about making Johnson’s points clear. Johnson did not feel that it was fair, couldn’t use all of “evidence” etc. Arends lamented about his poor communication…and that was a wrap!
Oy vea! These debates are like trying to determine what superhero was the toughest, fastest etc. Is Michael Jordan the best basketball player ever? So it goes.
I would like to see how the Christian deals with the night of the living dead, people coming back to life in droves, walking the streets. Also, Jesus is said to have exposed himself publically for some say 40 days, teaching, preaching etc. How is it possible for these events to have occurred without comment from any source? You just don’t have the resurrection, but a public, active after death ministry. “Hey, didn’t we just kill that guy?”...or… “Damn! I think we made a mistake!” Common sense would tell you that these events would send shock waves through out any community, ancient or not.
Just a thought.
My money is on you spencer lol
Go get'em Spencer.
Are there any pieces of Jerry McDonald left after Farrell Till was finished demolishing McDonald's arguments?
Till on McDonald
Update: Jerry McDonald told me via pm that he has submitted his opening statement and is now awaiting approval from the moderator.
update: Jerry McDonald is still waiting from the moderator the approve his opening statement. However, he has posted it on his site here: http://www.challenge2.org/introres.pdf
His opening statement got approved
http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=269819
the mod was probably sleeping lol
Not very impressed by his opening statement, I quote
''...but the fact of the matter is we are soldiers in two armies. I am in the army of Christ and my opponent, whether he realizes it or not, is in the army of Satan.''
*facepalm*
Well you got to trust a mind (McDonald) that uses the Encyclopedia Brittanica as a source book.
McDonald squanders his opening statement. The first 2/3 is taken up by knocking down outragous strawmen that have nothing to do with the resurrection. He instead first argues that Jesus did exist and that he did die by crucifiction, which is irrelevant. For instance He cites long passages from "Holy Blood Holy Grail" as his opposition's argument that Jesus did not die on the cross. Note to McDonald - that was a novel that nobody takes seriously. Want to debunk Dan Brown while your at it?
He then cites several articles from encylopedia Britannica as evidence that Jesus' resurrection is treated as a historical event. However, every article is prefaced with qualifiers like "Most Christians believe that ..." and "The Resurrection of Christ, a central doctrine of Christianity, is based on the belief that..." which clearly shows that the Encyclopedia regards these events as matters of faith that the Christian is to believe - and not regarded as a matter of history. Hey McDonald, it is no secret that Christians believe this stuff, the issue is whether it really happened or not.
I don't get it.. I am not a high falootin intellectual or anything, but I can just see right through this kind of stuff. The arguments never change - they never get any better - they just get repackaged and pushed again. The more I read these apologists, the more they remind me of oily Mister Haney from the old TV show Green Acres - he would do or say anything to sell his junk to Mr Douglas. And just like Mr Haney, their results are just as ludicrous.
Yes, it isn't a very threatening opening statement. Apart from the blunders mentioned above, the only parts that deal with the issues you intend to raise are the discussion on 'physical' vs. 'historical' events, which suggests he hasn't understood your argument, and the section 'Only By The Supernatural Power Of God Could Jesus Christ Have Been Raised From The Dead,' which is not so much an argument as an exercise in repeated assertion.
You should do fine.
update: I will submit my first rebuttal for approval in a couple of hours (the server is currently down).
the FRDB server has loads of problem, can't wait to see your first reply.
Post a Comment